Ok, I realize that epsxe is not technically "broken," as it does install, but on my two 5.1-RELEASE systems it segfaults upon execution. (or at least it doesn't display anything and the process is not there on top) I notified the maintainer about this issue about 2 weeks ago, and he has not yet responded. Well, it *is* a closed-source program as far as I can tell, so it is probably a difficult port if it has any linuxisms in its design.
Anyway, maybe it works under 4.7, or 4.8, (though I wouldn't know...) but it doesn't work for me on 5.1:(. If anyone wants an "easy" psx emu port, go for pcsx! I hacked at it a bit and it looks like it could be made compatable without too much fuss. (though it doesn't respect the linuxulator's.so files, for some reason) I was able to at least get it to display a gtk2 gui via linuxulator, but I haven't been able to get it to recognize psemu plugin ports yet... any ideas?
Oh, my roommate is really into that game, he says the teamwork is much better in that game than CStrike or DoD due to the strategy / FPS style of the game.
I suppose voices help make the game more tactically advanced in a way.
Aw, c'mon. Technology isn't necesarily anti-people, though it can be if the person isn't sociable to begin with. But then again, I'm a pretty shy person, and thanks to technology, I've met all kinds of interesting people, have all kinds of interesting discussions, and have all kinds of interesting hobbies... Now, tell me, what is detrimental about that? Maybe its to geeky for them? hmm??
I know it sounds odd, but I think this is making a Linux even more famous than it was before. Now all of my non-technical friends are asking me questions about Linux, UNIX, BSD, and what not. In fact, one of my friends who is a non-CS guy wants to install Redhat on his computer because of all the hype he's being hearing.
Everyone seems interested in the "other" OSes. Yeah, "those..":)
Cool, cool idea. I might add that public domain and BSDish licenses are ideal for this purpose. Just imagine, DARPA going along with OpenBSD, maybe another gov't decides to make its own desktop (sounds like Germany), maybe Japan will fund an open source game engine... I can dream can't I???
Well, I hate to say it, but I agree with the man. I never cared much for voice chat in games, much less voices in games.
Anyone like the voices in FFX? I know I don't. Because it ruins the imagination. The experience. Well, lets extend this concept to voice recognition in games. Same thing. Ruins the entire virtual aspect of MMORPG.
I think I'll eat a peanut butter and jelly sandwich now...
Sorry to respond to my own post, I just want to clarify a portion of it that was grossly misworded:
>They wouldn't be fearful of GPLing their existing
>codebase
What I *meant* to say was:
They wouldn't have the fear of opening their existing codebase as they would with the GPL.
My apologies.
I agree with you entirely, I don't understand why they are investing into Linux (the only reason is hype, since most people probably thinks that *BSD are just Linux distros) when they have so little to gain by doing so. If they invested in FreeBSD, they could gain so much more, and wouldn't have the annoying GPL on their backs. Then, their OS would be waaaay more standards compliant, even if they didn't give the code back.
They wouldn't be fearful of GPLing their existing codebase, so they would have used more open source code. In the Linux scenario, they will probably use small amounts of Linux because opening things up is too risky for them. Why should they open up an OS that is already complete?
Also, I thought your "perfect competition" scenario (in another thread I believe) was particularly insightful, it really combats the false perception that Linux is sucessful because of its license. Its success seems to be due to the fact that Torvalds is particularly adaptable to, and accepting of change.
Its nice to see (what looks to me) like a BSD-like license. Actually, I see the GPL incompatability as a good thing because then GPLs can't just invade the code and make it incompatable with BSD and MIT-based codebases.
I assume this just applies to the kernel, though I would love to see a fully non-GPL based desktop...
Cool, I love trance/electronica/ambient/house/dance/experimenta l music, it offers an entirely new landscape of compositional possiblities for me as a listener and as a composer. (well if I ever finish ANY of my work... hahaha) I've come to love the unique qualities of synths that so many people don't seem to notice.
Its good that you point out the large margins of music today that is electronic, because its so unarguably true. Almost all pop music is heavily synth-based, (although electronica, well trance anyway, is arguably more focused on the melody) yet people seem to object to the concept of electronic music - as unconventional, uncool, untrendy, well whatever I like it so thats enough ^_^
Well, I can think of one reason. The.tar.*z* double archives confuses the hell out of some people. Most people don't make tape backups after all.
I do lots of backups. But then again I've used tar.bz2 for quite a while.
> Why, oh why do people still compress everything with zip?
I don't know.
> "pirates" and "hackers" are using something else (rar, ace)
the defacto formats of irc and usenet;)
Hmm, I don't see why this is such a big deal.... bzip pretty much compresses higher than 'em all.
That plus, its GNU-free ^_^
zip? I don't really see why encryption was ever a critical feature in the format, (I thought it was a bunch of proprietary schemes to begin with) but I'll continue to use it to send some files.
I mean, its packaging system is not entirely up to date with the ports. Don't get me wrong, I love FreeBSD, and I use it on both of my machines, but I don't think its the ideal system for newbies.
Newbies should never deal with compiling from source, if you ask me. Sure, I'm happy with it, but I don't think my mom or my uncle understands why its taking 3 hours for them to install, say abiword, or kword...
The packaging system is pretty good, but it could be better. And on another topic, DragonFly seems to be emulating many cool Amiga-like kernel features into the OS. He seems very open minded, and could make BSD very popular.
Gimmick, true, but the same idea could be applied to a synth just as easily. Even better, the synth parameters could be tweaked in realtime using the same design.
I think its pretty cool. I've always liked stuff the MIT media lab was producing, especially CSound. True, its been many years past since Barry Vercoe was an MIT grad student, but damn, it made the MIT media lab famous.
Took a long time to download the demo, and while I don't think its terribly groundbreaking, its nice to see electronic instruments with 3 dimensional control of rhythm, amplitude, and timbre with such simple movements.
Overall, I think its a good idea, with definite possibilities for mass appeal. I want an audiopad now....
No, no, no, you anti-BSD trolls are all quite confused (and incorrect). No operating system is not physically alive, thats what I was intending to say. Next, BSD is not dead. (Only cynical./ readers, or windows users would say such things) In fact, its much easier to keep current with most *nix applications on FreeBSD than on most Linux Distributions, at least for me. Now, what I would constitute as being "alive" are three categories:
1) Is it maintained?
2) Is the source code available to fork if necessary?
3) Is it in widespread use?
The answer to #1 is definitely a yes. And is FreeBSD maintained? Yes. Is NetBSD maintained? Yes. Is OpenBSD maintained? Yes.
#2. Yes for all BSDs, well maybe a partial yes for Darwin...
#3 Is it in widespread use?
Sadly, this would have to be a no, but with the innovations of Darwin, (if you count that as BSD, then #3 is yes) and Dragonfly (which looks quite groundbreaking to me, if not much more so than Darwin)
So whats your problem, coward?? can't show your true face??
Tim
Thats just silly. I use FreeBSD as my production workstation (that includes XWindows, Gnome 2.x, lots of bleeding edge stuff) and it works fine.
*BSD isn't dead, and as long as its as FreeBSD is as well maintained as it is, I'm happy.
Time to update my ports tree.:)
Tim
Sounds cool, maybe its a chance for *BSD to gain some mainstream appeal. An improved package system could make it useable for mere mortals... Ah, but I'll probably stick to FreeBSD for the time being, it seems good enough to me...
Tim
Slashdot Mirror
Anyway, maybe it works under 4.7, or 4.8, (though I wouldn't know...) but it doesn't work for me on 5.1
-Tim
Oh, my roommate is really into that game, he says the teamwork is much better in that game than CStrike or DoD due to the strategy / FPS style of the game. I suppose voices help make the game more tactically advanced in a way.
Aw, c'mon. Technology isn't necesarily anti-people, though it can be if the person isn't sociable to begin with. But then again, I'm a pretty shy person, and thanks to technology, I've met all kinds of interesting people, have all kinds of interesting discussions, and have all kinds of interesting hobbies... Now, tell me, what is detrimental about that? Maybe its to geeky for them? hmm??
I know it sounds odd, but I think this is making a Linux even more famous than it was before. Now all of my non-technical friends are asking me questions about Linux, UNIX, BSD, and what not. In fact, one of my friends who is a non-CS guy wants to install Redhat on his computer because of all the hype he's being hearing. Everyone seems interested in the "other" OSes. Yeah, "those.." :)
Cool, cool idea. I might add that public domain and BSDish licenses are ideal for this purpose. Just imagine, DARPA going along with OpenBSD, maybe another gov't decides to make its own desktop (sounds like Germany), maybe Japan will fund an open source game engine... I can dream can't I???
Well, I hate to say it, but I agree with the man. I never cared much for voice chat in games, much less voices in games. Anyone like the voices in FFX? I know I don't. Because it ruins the imagination. The experience. Well, lets extend this concept to voice recognition in games. Same thing. Ruins the entire virtual aspect of MMORPG. I think I'll eat a peanut butter and jelly sandwich now...
Sorry to respond to my own post, I just want to clarify a portion of it that was grossly misworded: >They wouldn't be fearful of GPLing their existing >codebase What I *meant* to say was: They wouldn't have the fear of opening their existing codebase as they would with the GPL. My apologies.
They wouldn't be fearful of GPLing their existing codebase, so they would have used more open source code. In the Linux scenario, they will probably use small amounts of Linux because opening things up is too risky for them. Why should they open up an OS that is already complete?
Also, I thought your "perfect competition" scenario (in another thread I believe) was particularly insightful, it really combats the false perception that Linux is sucessful because of its license. Its success seems to be due to the fact that Torvalds is particularly adaptable to, and accepting of change.
--Tim
Its nice to see (what looks to me) like a BSD-like license. Actually, I see the GPL incompatability as a good thing because then GPLs can't just invade the code and make it incompatable with BSD and MIT-based codebases. I assume this just applies to the kernel, though I would love to see a fully non-GPL based desktop...
No its not. bz is not a native GNU application, and my FreeBSD bz2 uses either 'y' or 'j'. I use the 'y' way, because its better
Its good that you point out the large margins of music today that is electronic, because its so unarguably true. Almost all pop music is heavily synth-based, (although electronica, well trance anyway, is arguably more focused on the melody) yet people seem to object to the concept of electronic music - as unconventional, uncool, untrendy, well whatever I like it so thats enough ^_^
the y to j was GNU's stupid decision. Note that bz2 is not a GNU program ^_^
Well, I can think of one reason. The .tar.*z* double archives confuses the hell out of some people. Most people don't make tape backups after all.
I do lots of backups. But then again I've used tar.bz2 for quite a while.
> Why, oh why do people still compress everything with zip?
I don't know.
> "pirates" and "hackers" are using something else (rar, ace)
the defacto formats of irc and usenet ;)
Hmm, I don't see why this is such a big deal.... bzip pretty much compresses higher than 'em all. That plus, its GNU-free ^_^ zip? I don't really see why encryption was ever a critical feature in the format, (I thought it was a bunch of proprietary schemes to begin with) but I'll continue to use it to send some files.
> 3. Apply GPL notices to code.
Nah, omit the GPL. Its viral. How about say... the BSD or MIT licenses?
I mean, its packaging system is not entirely up to date with the ports. Don't get me wrong, I love FreeBSD, and I use it on both of my machines, but I don't think its the ideal system for newbies. Newbies should never deal with compiling from source, if you ask me. Sure, I'm happy with it, but I don't think my mom or my uncle understands why its taking 3 hours for them to install, say abiword, or kword... The packaging system is pretty good, but it could be better. And on another topic, DragonFly seems to be emulating many cool Amiga-like kernel features into the OS. He seems very open minded, and could make BSD very popular.
Gimmick, true, but the same idea could be applied to a synth just as easily. Even better, the synth parameters could be tweaked in realtime using the same design.
I think its pretty cool. I've always liked stuff the MIT media lab was producing, especially CSound. True, its been many years past since Barry Vercoe was an MIT grad student, but damn, it made the MIT media lab famous. Took a long time to download the demo, and while I don't think its terribly groundbreaking, its nice to see electronic instruments with 3 dimensional control of rhythm, amplitude, and timbre with such simple movements. Overall, I think its a good idea, with definite possibilities for mass appeal. I want an audiopad now....
why don't they just require Cisco certification instead? I've heard its more difficult. Maybe that would solve the problem.
No, no, no, you anti-BSD trolls are all quite confused (and incorrect). No operating system is not physically alive, thats what I was intending to say. Next, BSD is not dead. (Only cynical ./ readers, or windows users would say such things) In fact, its much easier to keep current with most *nix applications on FreeBSD than on most Linux Distributions, at least for me. Now, what I would constitute as being "alive" are three categories:
1) Is it maintained?
2) Is the source code available to fork if necessary?
3) Is it in widespread use?
The answer to #1 is definitely a yes. And is FreeBSD maintained? Yes. Is NetBSD maintained? Yes. Is OpenBSD maintained? Yes.
#2. Yes for all BSDs, well maybe a partial yes for Darwin...
#3 Is it in widespread use?
Sadly, this would have to be a no, but with the innovations of Darwin, (if you count that as BSD, then #3 is yes) and Dragonfly (which looks quite groundbreaking to me, if not much more so than Darwin)
So whats your problem, coward?? can't show your true face??
Tim
The statement of an anonymous coward, not BSD (which, incidentally, is *not* a living organism)
Thats just silly. I use FreeBSD as my production workstation (that includes XWindows, Gnome 2.x, lots of bleeding edge stuff) and it works fine. *BSD isn't dead, and as long as its as FreeBSD is as well maintained as it is, I'm happy. Time to update my ports tree. :)
Tim
Sounds cool, maybe its a chance for *BSD to gain some mainstream appeal. An improved package system could make it useable for mere mortals... Ah, but I'll probably stick to FreeBSD for the time being, it seems good enough to me... Tim